More than 90 percent of the 23,000 workers at 23 CSU campuses represented by the California Faculty Association campuses have voted in favor of striking unless they receive three years of annual pay raises of 5 percent, not the 2 percent annual raises offered by the state. A rally last week in Long Beach called by the CFA was attended by more than 1,000 people, Reuters reported. The wire service’s story illustrated a seemingly united CSU faculty:

“People are suffering and hurting financially,” said Theresa Montaño, a vice president of the California Teachers Association. “Faculty members can’t pay off their debt, raise a family or buy a home.”

 

During the march, many protesters said that if faculty members don’t get the salary increase, they are ready to walk off the job. …

 

Jennifer Eagan, a president for CFA, said it’s “unfair to ask professors keep sacrificing year after year without a significant pay increase.”

Faculty seek help from union-friendly state agency

The CFA further escalated its fight with the state government on Thursday by filing an unfair labor practices allegation with the state Public Employment Relations Board. This description is from the CFA’s website:

The charge is based on language in HEERA [the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act] which requires that the CSU and CFA reach an agreement on salary before the university sends a budget request to the Legislature and governor.

 

In fact, in both 2015-16 and 2016-17 the CSU made Support Budget requests that included their plan to implement a 2 percent faculty salary increase for each year. By making a budget request prior to reaching agreement with CFA on what would be needed to offer an adequate salary pool and by arguing that they have “allocated $65.5 million for a 2 percent compensation pool for all employees,” and limiting discussion of salary to that predetermined pool, the CSU has “violated its duty to meet and confer with CFA in good faith.”

 

In his remarks to the Board of Trustees on Wednesday November 18 Kevin Wehr highlighted the problem. “What you fail to understand is that deciding what you think is fair compensation for your employees before the bargaining process even begins is not bargaining in good faith,” Wehr said. “Indeed Section 3572b HEERA of recognizes that fact and says that once we reach an agreement ‘an appropriate request for financing or budgetary funding for all state-funded employees … shall be forwarded … to the Legislature and the Governor.’ You have put the cart before the horse.”

PERB has consistently ruled in favor of local government unions challenging “bad faith” decisions by governments on changes in compensation. This time, however, the ultimate target isn’t the cities of San Jose or San Diego or the Los Angeles Unified School District — it’s Gov. Jerry Brown, who cleaned house at PERB in 2011 and removed leaders chosen by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who had fought with the California Nurses Association for years.

The union seeks a 5 percent raise across the board for its members, which include teachers, librarians and counselors.

The university system is offering a 2 percent increase and says it has already boosted faculty pay by $65.5 million over the past two years.

The system’s senior faculty members were paid an average of $96,000 per academic year as of April, according to the last figures available from Cal State.

Divided on Contracting

While the issue is money, lobbying records show a divide on several other issues, most recently the use of contract employees.

Senate Bill 669 introduced earlier this year by Sen. Richard Pan, D-Sacramento, aimed at refining the parameters of contract hiring. The university opposed the measure while the union backed it and spent money lobbying for it, records show.

The legislation would have placed stricter oversight on the use of contracted employees, which is already part of the collective bargaining agreement between the union and the university.

The agreement allows contracting as long as it does not displace union members or require them to move to another campus that would require relocation, among other conditions.

The agreement also requires the university system to consider union employees for any contracting chores, provided the employees have the required skills.  

The bill was scrapped, but a similar measure restricting the University of California system, Senate Bill 376, was supported in testimony by Pat Gantt, president of California State University Employees Union.

That bill passed but was vetoed by Gov. Brown.

Both bills are similar to a measure introduced last session seeking to do the same thing. That bill failed in committee.

RELATED – How California State University beats the tuition hike freeze

Additional Legislation Causes Clashes

Last year, the two parties clashed on several other measures. Among them was Assembly Bill 2721, which would have required the university system to add another member to the board of trustees.

The measure was crafted by the union and carried by Sen. Pan in hopes of putting someone on the board to exclusively represent union interests.

The measure sailed through both chambers, 78-0 in the House and 33-1 in the Senate.

Brown vetoed the legislation, though, writing, “Since the Board of Trustees was established in 1960, there have only been four additions to the Board. The last of these was the addition of the non-voting student member in 1999.  I am not persuaded that increasing the membership of the Board beyond 25 is necessary.”

The union accused the university of “fear-mongering” regarding a measure that would have better defined extended education classes and how they applied to undergraduates.

It claimed the system was telling union members that the bill would result in layoffs. The union, which along with several other organized labor groups who backed the measure, advised its membership to ignore the threats.

The bill, carried by Assemblyman Adam C. Gray, D-Merced, died in committee.

Lobbying for Favor

Cal State’s administration and the union have both spent generously on lobbying over the past several years, often at odds.

California State this year has spent $92,000 on lobbying through June while the union has spent $83,760, records show.

Last year, the university spent $396,545 on lobby-related activities while the union spent $248,446.

The union’s political action committee spends heavily on the annual lobby days in April, bringing in members and running up bills for hotels and airfare. This year, the union spent $15,000 on promotional materials with a Massachusetts-based company. 

The California State University system has increased student activity fees to offset a tuition freeze, making parking and health services more expensive.

The union insists that the average CSU salary for union members has increased 8 percent since 2004, rising from $46,362 to $50,179 in 2014, while the average pay for a campus president has risen 44 percent, from $218,871 in 2004 to $314,357 in 2014.

CSU contends the proposed 2 percent raise is fair. In a statement from earlier this month, it says “the 2 percent compensation increase costs $32.8 million. The 6.2 percent total salary increase the CFA is proposing costs $101.7 million. The CSU will continue to work to improve compensation for all employees but must balance all critical priorities that support student success.”

By Chris Reed

If you think the California Teachers Association is the biggest villain in state politics — and you should, you should — then you’ll enjoy the Golden State implications of this national survey. This is from the Long Beach Press-Telegram:

“Yes, they’re ready. No, they’re not. A new survey shows a wide gap between high school teachers and college professors when it comes to the question of whether incoming freshmen are prepared for higher learning.

“Just 26 percent of college instructors believe students are well-prepared for first-year courses, compared to 89 percent of high school teachers, according to the ACT National Curriculum Survey.

“‘We’ve seen for a number of years that there have been gaps between what skills colleges say are most important for students to learn and what high school teachers and school districts are teaching,’ said Ed Colby, spokesman for ACT. ‘There doesn’t seem to be enough collaboration between local schools and colleges.'”

So in California, who represents the most high school teachers? Why, that would be the CTA. Everyone knows that, Chris, you big dummy.

CTA reps all CSU faculty, many community college instructors

But in California, who represents the most college instructors? Why, that would be the CTA — which not everyone knows.

“CTA has more than 1,300 chapters chartered as affiliates. Two unique CTA chapters are ‘statewide’ affiliates: The California Faculty Association is the bargaining agent for professors in the California State University system, and the Community College Association represents members in 42 bargaining chapters who work in 72 community college districts.”

So CSU and community college professors who belong to the CTA have a low opinion of the job done by their fellow CTA members in California high schools in educating our kids. Join the club!

What’s funny is how totally this undermines the CTA’s contention that is as concerned about school quality as every other “stakeholder” in California public education. If that were true, wouldn’t the union be especially inclined to heed the complaints of CTA members in the California Faculty Association and the Community College Association about the problems they see with K-12 graduates?

Of course the union would.

But then that takes seriously the CTA’s claims that it cares deeply about students. After Mark Berndt, that’s really not possible.

So for now, I will merely content myself with the enjoyable idea that two smaller wings of the CTA find a bigger wing of the CTA to be full of incompetent chumps.

Katy Grimes: Beware the student zombies at CSU Sacramento and CSU Sonoma. The California Faculty Association is sponsoring a flash mob today at the colleges, “with staff and students in costume, dancing to Michael Jackson’s ‘Thriller,’ with lyrics adapted to support Proposition 30.”

This is such responsible behavior from the faculty association, a group of adults supposedly who support college education.

“Faculty, staff and students at several CSU campuses have come up with a ghoulish way to promote the election on campus,” the Faculty Association website says.

“Faculty at East Bay, Sonoma and Sacramento will put a Halloween spin on their electoral efforts Wednesday as students and faculty – in full Halloween costumes – will perform spontaneous flashmobs for campus onlookers.”

Take a look at the California Faculty Association board, made up of a bunch of leftist Political Science, History and Anthropology professors. The protest today should be renamed Night of the Living Dead. 

“This just proves how self-focused and infantile the left is,” said Lance Izumi, Director of Education Studies at the Pacific Research Institute. “They love street theater.

“Who really thinks that these charades change anyone’s vote?” asked Izumi. “…only students and aging hippies.”

By John Hrabe

Every good protest has a catchy rallying cry. A simple memorable phrase that summarizes the movement’s agenda. The Vietnam War: “Hey-hey! Ho-ho! LBJ has got to go!” The Women’s Rights Movement: “What do we want? Equal Rights! When do we want it? Now!”

Over the past year, students, faculty and staff have organized protests and rallies at California State University campuses, as the country’s largest higher education system copes with annual tuition increases and budget cuts.  The California Faculty Association announced on Tuesday that, after all the protests, it finally had reached a tentative contract agreement with trustees. And the rallying cry is clear:

“What do we want?” 

* “Salary for 12-month department chairs on sabbatical shall be based on a 12-month — not academic year — salary schedule.”

* “The age of dependents eligible for fee waiver will increase from ‘up to 23 years of age’ to ‘up to 25 years of age.’”

That’s not a parody, but two exact quotes from the faculty association’s fact sheet on the deal that could end the faculty’s holdout. Have they really been holding out for revised sabbatical pay schedules and an increased age for dependent tuition waivers?

The faculty association’s fact sheet confirms how badly they were beaten by trustees. In fact, faculty members only played defense. The first 19 bullet points contain some variation of the phrases: “stopped management’s attempt to,” “defeated CSU administration’s legislative effort to,” and “beat back a chancellor proposal to.” Another CFA victory brought Cal State “up to date with state law to prohibit discrimination against faculty.”

The deal only goes into effect “upon ratification by CFA members and the CSU Board of Trustees.” CFA members can and should veto the agreement. They’re the only group with any leverage over trustees and could use their contract negotiations to change the corruption at Cal State.

Cal State Administrators Immune from Austerity Measures

Cal State Trustees have been arrogant. Top administrators continue to be dismissive of student and faculty concerns. And CSU presidents have been entirely immune from any budget cuts.  Since 2008, student fees have nearly doubled.  Faculty members have matched student sacrifices by foregoing pay raises and taking furlough days. Over that same time, there’s been no end to Cal State’s administrative excess. Don’t forget that these figures are just the president’s base pay.

* Elliot Hirshman, the president of San Diego State University, has received an annual salary bump of $154,500. He made $267,000 per year at the University of Maryland, but now makes $421,500 at San Diego.

* San Jose State University’s Mohammad Qayoumi takes home 38 percent more per year now that he moved over from the Cal State East Bay campus. He earned $237,072 per year at East Bay and earns $328,200 at San Jose.

* Dianne F. Harrison, the new president of Cal State Northridge, has increased her salary from $270,315 to $324,500 per year, a 20 percent raise over her previous base salary at the Monterey Bay campus.

* Mildred Garcia, Fullerton’s new president, also scored a 10 percent pay raise by changing campuses. She now earns $324,500 annually, a 10 percent raise over her previous post.

* Leroy Morishita, the new president at CSU East Bay, receives $303,660 per year, a 10 percent increase from his salary as the interim campus president.

* Leslie Wong, the new president of San Francisco State University, earns $123,000 more than he did at Northern Michigan University. His salary increased from $201,995 to $325,000 per year.

Enough Money for Pay Raises for Top Managers

Cal State presidents have shared the wealth with their top managers.  According to an analysis of payroll data, Cal State presidents awarded 486 pay raises to top managers from 2008-10. Cal State Chancellor Charles Reed handed out another 80 pay raises to his chosen bureaucratic elite.  Those figures excluded promotions for staff that have internally changed positions.

“On an annualized basis, these discretionary raises added $6.5 million to the cost to run the CSU system,” the study’s authors concluded. You’d expect the California Faculty Association to highlight such inequitable measures in their negotiations, especially given that they authored the report.

Cal State has repeatedly defended the pay raises as necessary to retain and recruit the best talent. “We need to be able to recruit and retain the best and the brightest individuals,” said Mike Uhlenkamp spokesman for the Cal State chancellor’s office. Apparently, that logic only applies to presidents and not faculty members.

“Fair Agreement in Hard Times”

“It’s a fair agreement in the context of hard times,” said Lillian Taiz, the president of the California Faculty Association. “We are disappointed we were not able to get a raise, but that wasn’t in the cards. It was a tough pill to swallow, I won’t kid you.” Taiz is right. Given the current budget situation, it’s completely unreasonable for faculty to secure higher pay or increased benefits. However, Cal State faculty could have achieved something worth more than money: respect.

Faculty Association Should Demand Faculty Salaries Be Tied to Administrators’

The California Faculty Association should reject the current contract and demand just one additional contract provision: All salaries, including administrators, campus presidents and top managers, shall be linked to the faculty’s pay and benefits. To keep trustees honest, the policy should be applied to all pay, including bonuses paid out by nonprofit auxiliary foundations.

With just this one demand, CFA members could fix Cal State’s attitude problem. No more presidential pay raises. Faculty members could force a new policy of shared sacrifice and tie administrators’ success to their own.  Everyone at Cal State would be on the same page and face the system’s upcoming challenges together.

Faculty members don’t teach for the money. They do it because they love teaching. But, more and more, faculty are finding it hard to teach for a university system that creates one set of rules for administrators and another for faculty members. It’s especially disrespectful given that faculty are the only ones in the classroom.

Shared Sacrifice! Equal Austerity! Not bad slogans for the next Cal State protest.